In 1893, an Indian lawyer named Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (Ben Kingsley) is thrown from a train in South Africa for sitting in a first-class carriage, despite having a valid ticket. This incident leads him back to India, where he does battle against the dictatorial rule of the British Empire, and embarks on a campaign that will change the world forever…
Doug says...
IWe’ve now watched fifty-five films, dating from 1927 up to this one in 1982. That’s a wide range of films, coming from different angles, perspectives and creative paths, and so I sometimes find it hard to rank films against each other.
That said, this is easily the best film out of all fifty five seen so far. It is, for want of a better word, extraordinary.
There’s so much to talk about that I don’t know where to start, and I begin fully in the knowledge I won’t even scratch the surface. It’s intelligent, raw, brave and features remarkable performances right across the board. It portrays Gandhi’s non-violent tactics in full view, and makes you understand firstly how revolutionary they were, and secondly how they had such an effect. The first half ends with a horrific massacre of Indian civilians by an unfeeling general. But an example of what elevates this film is that it doesn’t end the half there, but goes on to have a scene where the offending general is then questioned by his army superiors who are openly disturbed by his actions, forced to realise their own horrendous actions simply by the Indian people’s refusal to fight back.
Another scene highlights this, showing a group of protestors walking up to guards preventing them from entering salt mines, and allowing themselves to be beaten. Wave after wave of protestors approaches and are struck down, until the inevitable reports horrify the world at large, placing the British rulers squarely in the place of ‘abuser’.
Director Richard Attenborough does not falter once during this three hour epic. There is no scene that feels unnecessary, if anything he slightly rushes over Gandhi’s trip to London to meet with officials. He balances the full, aggressive scenes (never have riot scenes felt quite so unsettling and full of menace) against beautifully calm scenes of rural peace. We see Gandhi both as protestor and as family man, interrupting a meeting with his advisors to go help his granddaughter tend to the goats. So too it is with the people around him - his devoted wife spins quietly in the background but also speaks at public gatherings and openly defies the police.
All this is without even mentioning the central performance by Ben Kingsley as Gandhi. It vies with Marion Cottillard in La Vie En Rose as Edith Piaf for the title of Greatest Screen Performance Ever. Feelings and emotion transmit from him, his rage when seeing the aftermath of the massacre, his impish enjoyment of watching the British repeatedly jail him, only to release him, his overwhelming sorrow when holding his dying wife’s hand. It is a performance that many actors would dream to give, and even in the quieter moments, when he is peacefully spinning wool, or chiding his grandchildren (only to immediately pat their head), he is utterly, fully Gandhi. I love particularly how he shows the human: the instances of rage, the humorous jokester, and the caring family man.
They’re all helped by a script that does exactly what it needs to. It explains what’s happening, but never spoon-feeds, and never feels false, even for a second. Moments such as when Gandhi enters court on trial, and the judge stands in respect, forcing the entire courtroom to follow suit, are not explained or referenced, but allowed to stand on their own, and are all the more powerful for it.
It’s a film that provokes anger and outrage, and brought me to tears at multiple points - particularly when Gandhi realises his fast to prevent the Muslims and Hindus from fighting has succeeded. Kingsley, without moving a muscle, conveys the heartfelt relief and care that Gandhi has for his country and fellow citizens.
A film that uses every minute of its three hour time to the best effect. Overwhelmingly powerful, focused and truthful, and a real homage to its extraordinary subject.
Highlight
The entire film? The closing shot of the waves lapping with the sunset sinking behind it, captures so much in a simple image. Attenborough proves himself a master with every angle used.
Lowlight
There isn't one.
Mark
If I could, it’d be 11 out of 10. So it’s a begrudging 10.
Paul says...
Biopics are relatively frequent at the Oscars - they’re usually about great or at least noteworthy people, with strong socio-political connections to the audiences watching at the time of the film’s release. So far, the winning biopics have swung between the trite and dull (The Great Ziegfeld and Patton), and the inspirational (The Life of Emile Zola and A Man For All Seasons). Gandhi sits very firmly in the latter category.
It boasts many selling points. The three-hour running time never feels stretched or overlong (if anything, it needed more time, but we’ll deal with that in a moment). Ben Kingsley’s central performance is transformational. He was 39 at the time of the film’s release, but I was completely convinced that he was anywhere between 24 and 78 throughout the film’s chronology. He’s natural, witty, and moving, and proof that whilst he may be relegated to “wise old man” supporting roles now, he is actually an absolute revelation. It also has a phenomenal host of supporting actors - John Gielgud, Terence Howard, John Mills, Richard Griffiths, Martin Sheen, Edward Fox, and Nigel Hawthorne have all answered their mate Attenborough’s call and scrambled eagerly for a few lines. Even John Savident (Fred Elliot in Coronation Street) and Shane Rimmer (the voice of Scott Tracey in Thunderbirds) find their ways in. Whilst it may seem pointless seeing as Kingsley is the fulcrum around which the entire work revolves, it’s still fun to play “spot the star”.
It’s also a film for a big screen. The crowd scenes render the experience completely immersive. I really felt like I was there at Gandhi’s funeral, or at the horrifying Amritsar Massacre, or on the march to the sea to get salt, or on the over-crowded trains travelling the many provinces of India. At no point did I lose that sense of escapism, and this helped me to cheer on Gandhi’s and India’s efforts towards independence, and despaired during those inevitable times when violence took over.
As excellent as it is, I am hesitant to give Gandhi a full 10. Controversial, I know, because Gandhi himself deserves nothing but 10’s across the board. But let me explain why. I mentioned earlier that the film could potentially do with more time. Perhaps I’m a product of my time. The best biopics nowadays cover several episodes of a TV show or even several seasons (prime examples are John Adams and Netflix’s The Crown, which will spend an entire hour-long episode on one event in the Queen’s life). In the cinema world, biopics tend to focus on one aspect of an icon’s life and dissect it for all its worth. The Queen starring Helen Mirren, Frost/Nixon, and the Elizabeth films starring Cate Blanchett manage to illustrate their titular subjects through just a small phase of their life- and with moving results.
Gandhi could have done with a bit of this. His fasting as a result of Indian violence towards British troops, his visit to London, the Hindu-Muslim tensions post-independence (which admittedly take up a majority of the final hour but could have had an entire film dedicated to it), all feel summarised, as if this is the edited highlights of Gandhi’s life, rather than a full study. A TV series could have answered some of my questions such as: what were discussions in UK Parliament like during this time? What truly became of Colonel Dyer, who ordered the Amritsar Massacre? What was life like in Pakistan when it was formed- and what were Gandhi’s thoughts on this in the first place?
I know, I know, I’m being picky and a quick trip to Wikipedia could solve all of this. I should assert that this doesn’t detract from how marvellous this film is. It dedicates itself entirely to showing Gandhi’s values and philosophy, and has lessons in there that everyone, absolutely everyone, needs to learn. Watch it, learn from it, and, like me, start planning that trip to India right now.
Highlight
The Amritsar Massacre is a terrifying set piece, in which British troops led by Colonel Dyer opened fire on peaceful protestors- men, women and children are brutally slaughtered. Incidentally, Dyer remained popular within those connected to the British Raj, but not in the House of Commons. He was removed from his position, and never allowed employment in India again. He should, really, have been tried for murder.
Lowlight
I felt like the final hour was a bit of a rush through the Hindu-Muslim tensions that came about after India’s independence was established. Attenborough might as well have tried to make an hour-long film about Palestine.
Mark
8/10
No comments:
Post a Comment